Jaimes v. Uwharrie Knits, Inc.
I.C. NO. W15705.
| N.C. Indus. Comm. | Aug 1, 2011Background
- Plaintiff, 42, a Mexican national with limited English, worked as a janitor for Defendant-Employer.
- On April 6, 2009, Plaintiff assisted unloading fabric rolls; a rack fell, striking her left arm and lower extremity and causing an abrasion.
- She was transported by ambulance to Stanly Regional Medical Center; initial ER note attributed weakness to a fall/stroke history but her daughter clarified the incident.
- Plaintiff worked briefly after the incident but could not perform duties and did not return to work for Defendant-Employer or any employer thereafter.
- Medical treatment included ER care, a Stanly County Health Department visit, and later Dr. Zucker evaluations; an MRI of the knee was performed later with normal results.
- As of the hearing, Plaintiff had not recovered full function in the left leg and remained unable to return to prior employment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Plaintiff sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of employment. | Plaintiff contends the rack incident caused left arm/leg injuries. | Defendant contends the claimed injuries are not compensable. | Yes, injury by accident established. |
| Whether Plaintiff was totally disabled from 4/6/2009 to 5/4/2011. | Plaintiff argues total disability due to injury. | Defendant challenges extent/duration of disability. | Plaintiff was totally disabled during that period. |
| Whether the medical treatment related to the April 6, 2009 incident is payable. | Plaintiff seeks compensation for ER, ambulance, health department, and subsequent care. | Defendant disputes some medical treatments. | Yes, related medical treatment is payable. |
| How is Plaintiff's average weekly wage and compensation rate determined. | AWW should reflect earnings with adjustments per Form 22. | AWW calculated per wage chart with deductions. | AWW $281.23; compensation rate $187.50. |
| Whether Plaintiff has any permanent partial disability. | Plaintiff seeks PPD consideration if present. | No PPD arising from the incident. | No permanent partial disability. |
Key Cases Cited
- Byrd v. Ecofibers, Inc., 182 N.C. App. 728, 645 S.E.2d 80 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007) (employee testimony as to pain and work ability admissible in disability determination)
- Click v. Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc., 300 N.C. 164, 265 S.E.2d 389 (N.C. 1980) (medical questions may be resolved without expert testimony in certain cases)
- Boles v. U.S. Air, Inc., 148 N.C. App. 493, 560 S.E.2d 809 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002) (supports consideration of credibility and disability evidence)
- Knight v. Wal-Mart Stores, 149 N.C. App. 1, 502 S.E.2d 434 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002) (disability and wage/medical issues in workers’ compensation)
